The formation of the first off-planet permanent colony will establish humankind as a multi-planetary species. The need for it is seen as so pressing that tech entrepreneur Elon Musk, one of the most influential people in the world, has devoted his career to it.

Musk may grab the headlines but he’s only the poster boy for a worldwide effort from national space programmes and other multi-billion dollar business ventures.

And it’s said to be likely that this colony will be established while millennials today are still alive to see it happen.

‘While Nasa spinoffs and other inventions can allow us to be more thrifty with Earth’s resources, we nevertheless must come to grips with the problem that humanity is currently limited to one planet,’ Nasa writes.

Advertisement

Advertisement

‘Space colonies could be the answer to this problem if we can solve the medical problems posed by microgravity (also called weightlessness) and the high levels of radiation to which the astronauts would be exposed after leaving the protection of the Earth’s atmosphere.

‘The colonists would mine the Moon and the minor planets and build beamed power satellites that would supplement or even replace power plants on the Earth.

‘The colonists could also take advantage of the plentiful raw materials, unlimited solar power, vacuum, and microgravity in other ways to create products that we cannot while inside the cocoon of Earth’s atmosphere and gravity.’

The mechanics of how such a colony would survive and thrive are well known by this point. Fabricated structures would be flown to the pre-determined location in advance and assembled by drones before the humans got there to take up residence.

Once settled, humans would need to set up facilities to utilise the resources on the planet for fuel in order to generate power for the habitat.

These impressive-looking concepts are still some way off, we’re afraid (Blue Origin)

Lewis Dartnell, an author and professor of science communication at the University Of Westminster is so convinced of our ability to establish a colony like this, he’s prepared to put a deadline on it.

‘In the next 100 years, it’s very feasible we will have a self-sustaining colony on the Moon or Mars,’ he tells Metro.co.uk.

‘These could then keep themselves going and serve as a sort of “backup file” if we suffered some sort of apocalypse event here on Earth.’

Advertisement

Advertisement

Apocalypse notwithstanding, Dartnell reckons that Mars is the better location:

‘There’s much more stuff you can use there [than on the Moon],’ he says.

‘Nasa is very keen on what’s called “In Situ Resource Utilisation” which basically means using the stuff you’ve got up there. So they would send astronauts up with basic infrastructure and then use Martian regolith to build things.

‘They would also thaw out the subsurface ice to create water on the planet.

‘Mars is more likely a destination because there’s more you can use – the Moon is closer but it’s that much more barren.

‘Bear in mind that Elon Musk is already talking, very credibly, about the first human missions to mars taking place in the next ten years.’

Of course, we have to take a moment to point out that not everybody believes we’ll be jumping ship to colonise the Red Planet as an alternative to Earth.

‘We can hope that these people will go to Mars and be at the forefront of developing new technologies because they’ll have every incentive to adapt to a hostile environment,’ Cambridge Professor Martin Rees told Vox.

‘But I strongly disagree with Elon Musk and my late colleague Stephen Hawking who talk about mass immigration to Mars.

‘I think that’s a dangerous delusion because Mars will be a more hostile environment than the top of Everest or the South Pole, and dealing with climate change here on Earth is far more important than terraforming Mars.’

Advertisement

But even if Mars doesn’t become humankind’s holiday home, there’s a strong chance we’ll establish a permanent presence over there.

While Nasa is looking to the stars, private finance and technology – rather than states – is competing to win the ‘race’ to establish off-world colonies.

Amazon’s Jeff Bezos has founded space aerospace manufacturer Blue Origin which has recently revealed some concept images of what we could (one day) be living in.

Can you see yourself living here? (Blue Origin)

The concept images build off work done by physicist Gerard O’Neill, who Bezos studied under during his time at Princeton University.

The habitats are designed to be self-sustaining and could, one day, allow trillions of people to live in off-world colonies.

‘We get to choose, do we want stasis and rationing, or do we want dynamism and growth?’ Bezos reportedly asked during an invite-only event in Washington DC where he revealed the images.

‘This is an easy choice. We know what, we want we just have to get busy.’

Given that the ambitious Mars One project budgeted the cost at sending just four people to Mars at $10 billion (£7.9bn), including hardware and operations, Bezos will have to come up with some concrete ideas for supporting his ideas financially.

Advertisement

With an estimated personal fortune of £114 billion, Bezos could potentially send 44 people up to Mars before running out of cash.

‘Space doesn’t have to be a giant money sink as companies today are already investigating ways to make money from it,’ Dartnell tells Metro.co.uk

‘For example, mining near-Earth asteroids could yield materials that can be brought back to Earth and sold, thereby making the space industry pay for itself and create its own resources.’

So, if you’re reading this Jeff, it might be an idea to start mining some asteroids.

The Future Of Everything

From OBEs to CEOs, professors to futurologists, economists to social theorists, politicians to multi-award winning academics, we think we've got the future covered, away from the doom-mongering or easy Minority Report references.